Reshaping the Arbitration Court

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 190, 1 November 1927, Page 16

Reshaping the Arbitration Court

BUSINESS VIEWPOINT PREFERENCE OPPOSED (Special to THE SUN.) CHRISTCHURCH, Monday. The views of business men in regard to the reconstitution of the Arbitration Court are set forth in a remit adopted by the conference of the Associated Chambers of Commerce. The remit, which was prepared by a special committee set up to consider the proposed amendments to the Act, is as follows: T “That this conference commends the Government for having introduced legislation designed to improve the constitution of the Arbitration Court and the functioning of the arbitration system, and resolves that a considered statement of the views of the conference in these matters be forwarded to the Government.” Reporting on the constitution, functions and effects of the arbitration system, the committee stated that the following objections had been made: (a) That the system was good while wages and prices were rising, but now that the tide was turned it does not operate to the general benefit. (b) The system limits production. (c) It increases costs. (d) It hampers progress. (e) It stifles initiative. (f) It promotes unemployment. (g) There is too great rigidity in the fixation and interpretation of conditions governing employment. (h) The welfare of the general public is disregarded. FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT After quoting the summary of replies received to the questions sent out by the Associated Chambers of Commerce, the committee made the following recommendations, which the conference endorsed: (a) The Arbitration Court should be continued if its functions and constitution are revised. (b) The principles enunciated in the Amendment Bill providing for payment on piecework should be adopted. (c) We do not disagree with a basic subsistence wage, but this should be a minimum which every worker should increase by effort. (d) Payment should generally be by results and • should be based on the value and volume of output. (e) Wages should not be based on such artificial conditions as the size of a man’s family, or the pre-war cost of living, but must be based on the economic position of the Dominion as a whole, the state of the primary producers, and the interests of the consumer. (f) Due regard must be given to the economic fallacy of attempting to maintain wages at an unduly high level under protection. (g) Preference to unionists should be abolished. (h) There should be less restriction of conditions ir~ >r which industry may be carried on and conditions in award's should be interpreted reasonably, not with cast-iron rigidity. <i) It should be made a penal offence for any person to coerce or cajole anv worker to restrict his output in order to give full effect to these recommendations. EMPHASIS ON REAL WAGES The conference further approved of the following proposals: “ That the court be constituted of ! Utree permanent members, namely, two udges of the Supreme Court and one economist of note, the latter particularly to safeguard the interests of the general public. "The conference disapproves the ap- j pointment of assessors, considering that decisions should be the opinion of a majority of the above three permanent members of the court, acting purely in a judicial capacity. Full opportunity* should, of course, be given, as now, for • all parties affected to make represen-

throu^h own representamedia. counse l» or through other “Employers should be advised and t J* e induced to adopt improved methods and institute more efficient administration in order to do their full part in the economic readjustment now facing the Dominion. “ The conference is not antagonistic o trades unionism, but favours its egitimate existence and operations It las not, and will not, oppose any increase in money wages when justifiable. It nevertheless unequivocally affirms the principle that all movements in wages costs and prices must be directed toward the increase of real wages and the reduction of the coat of living.*’